Subject:
|
Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 6 Feb 2003 15:14:39 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
365 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> I snipped a BUSHEL of irrelevant misdirection. This is a question about
> 1441, not the US second amendment or anything else
Since rants often go on tangential tirades, well, sorry 'bout that. But I
wouldn't call it 'misdirection', I'd call it 'selective reading' on the part
of the US.
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes:
>
> > Again, agreed--Iraq is no angel at all, and I have no doubt about the trucks
> > carrying stuff to make biological/chemical weapons that Powell laid out in
> > his presentation. I have no doubt about the plants that were cleared out
> > before the inspectors got there, and I have no difficulty with the idea that
> > we may need force to get these WoMD out of the country
>
> OK, then, David. Stripped of all the other non topical stuff in your post,
> you concede that Iraq is in material breach of 1441 and the other relevant
> UN resolutions. 1441 says that *when* Iraq is in material breach, there are
> to be serious consequences.
And now that Powell has conclusively proven that the US is in breach of
1441, what consequenses should the US face? None? Well aren't we just
hypocritical! (which is the point with all that parchment stuff I alluded
to--the US believes what they want to believe, in defiance of all rationale
and logical proof to the contrary)
> Serious consequences... OK, what are they? Now that it's been established
> that Iraq is in breach, what is to be done about it?
>
> Answer specifically. Leave out any rhetoric about who delivered the message
> that they're in breach or what putative motives there might be for wanting
> whatever to happen and specifically address what serious consequences Iraq
> should now face.
Again, demeaning the point of the other side by belittling it with terms
like 'rhetoric'--the truth is still the truth, no matter how you try to
belittle it--Your country is in direct violation of the same resolution that
you're holding Iraq to--how 'bout that?
>
> And if your answer is "more inspections" you fail. The inspection phase is
> OVER. It did its job. It found evidence of material breach. Now what?
No, because the *inspectors* haven't found much. The resolution calls for
the inspectors to go find stuff and to prove conclusively, one way or the
other, that WoMD exist, and the US has been holding back this info that the
inspectors could have used. Going by the US sayso isn't what the resolution
calls for--going by what the inspectors find, is what the resolution calls for.
Now when such evidence is found, then the *United Nations* should, and will,
decide what to do--a united decision from all parties concerned.
And the message from John--once again the arrogant 'US above all' comes thru
loud and clear. What makes you think that an American life is worth more to
the world than, say, a person from Madagascar? What gives you the right to
flaunt international law and convention as you see fit? It just boils down
to bullying.
It's an interesting state of affairs when I'm on the same team as Scott ;)
Dave K
|
|
Message has 4 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
69 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
